Lost sharpness on new ATI card

  • Thread starter Thread starter Snaggeltooth
  • Start date Start date
S

Snaggeltooth

Hi,

Saturday I woke up to a toasted vid card and had to get a new one, so off to
CompUSA I went. I ended up getting an ATI Radeon 9600SE AGP 128mb 8x/4x and
had a little trouble installing the driver from the CD that came with the
card, so I surfed to the ATI web site and downloaded a driver from there. I
did eventually get it working, and after switching the screen resolution
back to what I had before my other vid card decided to call it quits (1024 x
768) I found that I has a LOT of space on either site of the "screen" that
was not being used. Something like a whole inch on either side. I have a
19 inch standard SVGA monitor and taking a two inches away gives me
something like a friggin 15" monitor. When I went into the monitor controls
and tweaked them so the usable screen area is stretched to a more reasonable
position giving me a 19 inch monitor again, I loose some acuity and
sharpness on fonts, graphics, just about everything. It gets worse the
closer to the middle of the screen, and it was driving me nuts, so I changed
it back. Now, I am looking at a crisp screen again, but its only giving me
a 15 inch usable screen area. Is there anything I can do? Please someone
give me some insight to this problem as its driving me nuts. I might as
well unhook this 19 inch monitor and hook the old 15 inch back up and save
some desk space!

ST
 
Try setting the refresh rate back to 72 or 75 hertz. The card is probably
detecting that the monitor can go higher, but going higher many degrade the
image on some monitors. You really wont see any differance above 75 hertz
anyway.

Jim
 
Jim,

I have the refresh rate set at 60, which was the lowest it would go. I did
set it to 75 at one point, but my "usable screen size" didn't change at all.
I've heard from other people who have Dell monitors and Radeon cards that
their screen real-estate is diminished too.... must be something inherent
with this card and Dell monitors.

ST
 
Jim,

You don't know how happy you have made me!!! Now, I don't have to return
this card and shop for a new one.

I took my monitor back to factory settings, then changed the refresh rate to
75 hertz, and BINGO! the screen widened out automatically. You are
amazing!! thank you again.
 
Does this card have TV out? Make sure you have the ATI schemes set to
"default single display."
 
I have the refresh rate set at 60, which was the lowest it would go. I did
set it to 75 at one point, but my "usable screen size" didn't change at all.
I've heard from other people who have Dell monitors and Radeon cards that
their screen real-estate is diminished too.... must be something inherent
with this card and Dell monitors.

ST
Click to expand...

No, I had a Dell monitor and everything worked fine. The refresh rate
depends on the resolution of the monitor. I would suggest that you lover
you resolution, so you could set your refresh rate to, atleast, 85Hz. 85Hz
is a minimum by the ISO standard at which most people can't see if the
monitor is flickering. It allso stresses you eyes the least (a lot less
then 60 and 75 Hz do).
 
Barry said:
How about adjusting the height and width on the monitor itself?
Click to expand...


My Sony G400 and later versions of the Voodoo driver gave me small shadows
on the left hand side... they'd changed the timings in the driver, so I just
planted the old ones into the new drivers.

Powerstrip can adjust the timings as well, but you kind of need to know what
you're doing sometimes.

Ben
 
I tried that, and thats how I lost the acuity and sharpness. Everything is
fixed now..... It was the refresh rate set at 60. When I turned it up to
75, the usable screen area automatically widened out to fill the entire
monitor area. Very strange, but who cares cause it worked.
 
Well, when you go and REPLACE the graphics card those things are going to
need to be set up from the default settings. I just can't believe it took
about 5 or 6 posts to figure it out.

On a 19" monitor 85Hz is the minimum refresh rate you "should" be running.
75Hz is for 17" monitors. If you can't select 85Hz you may need to download
the driver for your monitor to replace the default VGA adapter driver that
MS provides.
 
LeeB18509 said:
Well, when you go and REPLACE the graphics card those things are
going to need to be set up from the default settings. I just can't
believe it took about 5 or 6 posts to figure it out.

On a 19" monitor 85Hz is the minimum refresh rate you "should" be
running. 75Hz is for 17" monitors.
Click to expand...

Do you have any more info on this... my gut feeling is that it shouldn't
matter what size the screen is, but larger screens tend to be easier to see
flicker on.

Ben
 
On a 19" monitor 85Hz is the minimum refresh rate you "should" be running.
Click to expand...

That is surely down to the monitor and the individual. 75Hz works best
for me on my monitor.
 
Ben Pope said:
Do you have any more info on this... my gut feeling is that it shouldn't
matter what size the screen is, but larger screens tend to be easier to see
flicker on.

Ben
Click to expand...

This is what I have.
http://www.necmitsubishi.com/products/home/nec_index.cfm
"Recommended resolution: 1280x1024 @ 85Hz"

If you have an el-cheapo it may not be able to go that high, in which
case you'd have to run 1024x768. But you still want the 85Hz, screen
size does matter. A larger screen needs a faster refresh rate. It
just looks better.
Of course, YMMV...
 
Lee said:
This is what I have.
http://www.necmitsubishi.com/products/home/nec_index.cfm
"Recommended resolution: 1280x1024 @ 85Hz"

If you have an el-cheapo it may not be able to go that high, in which
case you'd have to run 1024x768. But you still want the 85Hz, screen
size does matter.
Click to expand...

I use 1600x1200@85Hz on my Sony G400. Personally I can't stand anything
less than ~80Hz - it makes my eyes hurt within seconds. I personally
recommend 80-85Hz.
A larger screen needs a faster refresh rate. It
just looks better.
Click to expand...

This is the bit I would like more details about...

After having thought about it for a bit, I suspect it's because the screen
is bigger, yet you tend not to sit any further away, so it takes up more of
your visual field. It seems that flicker is detected better in peripheral
vision... I think that is something to do with the concentration of, or
ratio of rods and cones.

Ben
 
Ben Pope said:
I use 1600x1200@85Hz on my Sony G400. Personally I can't stand anything
less than ~80Hz - it makes my eyes hurt within seconds. I personally
recommend 80-85Hz.


This is the bit I would like more details about...

After having thought about it for a bit, I suspect it's because the screen
is bigger, yet you tend not to sit any further away, so it takes up more of
your visual field. It seems that flicker is detected better in peripheral
vision... I think that is something to do with the concentration of, or
ratio of rods and cones.

Ben
Click to expand...
I wanted to go with a Sony, I was really back and forth on the aperture
grill monitors. It's those damn lines! I ended up with the NEC for $229.
As for your theory, I completely agree. Now if only I could find a website
to prove it.....

*Impression IM-21 Black Case w/Antec Truepower 431W PS*MSI K7N2
Delta-L*Athlon XP [email protected]*Vantec Aeroflow*2x256 OCZ PC3200EL
2.0-2-3-7 (2.6v)*ATI 9700 Pro*Seagate 120Gb*2x80GB WD "SE" riding a
RocketRAID100*Lite-on 48/24/48/16 CD-RW/DVD combo*Audigy*Klipsch Promedia
4.1's*Adaptec Media Center (PCI)*NEC MS97F-BK*XP Pro SP1*Logitech
Elite/MX700*BCC (Big Comfy Chair)
 
LeeB18509 said:
I wanted to go with a Sony, I was really back and forth on the
aperture grill monitors. It's those damn lines!
Click to expand...

I don't take any notice of them. I know where they are, but I don't see
them unless I look. When I say 1600x1200 on a 19" screen people cringe, but
the picture is as sharp as they come. I can read 8pt text in Word with two
full pages in view (87% zoom) :-)
I ended up with the
NEC for $229. As for your theory, I completely agree. Now if only I
could find a website to prove it.....
Click to expand...

Hehe, good luck :-)

Ben
 
Ben Pope said:
I don't take any notice of them. I know where they are, but I don't see
them unless I look. When I say 1600x1200 on a 19" screen people cringe, but
the picture is as sharp as they come. I can read 8pt text in Word with two
full pages in view (87% zoom) :-)
Click to expand...
I know the Sony's are nice. I was one day away from buying a G410 or 420, I
think? Cost was a factor though , I have a commander to answer to.
 
LeeB18509 said:
I know the Sony's are nice. I was one day away from buying a G410 or
420, I think? Cost was a factor though , I have a commander to answer
to.
Click to expand...


I figure that the screen is the most useful peripheral and that a huge chunk
of the budget should go there. I spend a long time in front of my machine,
and justified it to myself on those grounds. :-)

Ben
 
Ben Pope said:
I figure that the screen is the most useful peripheral and that a huge chunk
of the budget should go there. I spend a long time in front of my machine,
and justified it to myself on those grounds. :-)

Ben
Click to expand...
In my case, I_had_ to have a decent monitor to show off the prowess of my
new 9700 Pro! Duh...Imagine your graphics card being held back by your
monitor. The horror.
 
LeeB18509 said:
In my case, I_had_ to have a decent monitor to show off the prowess
of my new 9700 Pro! Duh...Imagine your graphics card being held back
by your monitor. The horror.
Click to expand...

Hehe. I had to have 9800 Pro to show off my new computer... I was expecting
HL2 to be out by now :-( Doesn't look like that'll happen for a while - I
think April is the rough ETA now. Gutted.

Ben
 
Back
Top